Relationships between Duck and Grassland Bird Relative Abundance and Species Richness in Southern Saskatchewan

Digital map products that integrate long-term duck population and land-use data are currently being used to guide conservation program delivery on the Canadian Prairies. However, understanding the inter-relationships between ducks and other grassland bird species would greatly enhance program planning and delivery. We hypothesized that ducks, and Northern Pintail (Anas acuta) in particular, may function as an umbrella guild for the overall breeding habitat quality for other grassland bird species. We compared grassland bird species richness and relative abundance among areas of low, moderate, and high predicted waterfowl breeding densities (i.e., duck density strata) in the southern Missouri Coteau, Saskatchewan. We conducted roadside point counts and delineated habitats within a 400 m radius of each point. The duck high-density stratum supported greater avian species richness and abundance than did the duck low-density stratum. Overall, duck and other grassland bird species richness and abundance were moderately correlated, with all r between 0.37 and 0.69 (all P < 0.05). Although the habitat requirements of Northern Pintail may overlap with those of other grassland endemics, priority grassland bird species richness was only moderately correlated with total pintail abundance in both years, and the abundances of pintail and grassland songbirds listed by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada were not correlated. No differences in the mean number of priority grassland species were detected among the strata. Adequate critical habitat for several priority species may not be protected if conservation is focused only in areas of moderate to high wetland density because large tracts of contiguous, dry grassland habitat (e.g., pasture) occur infrequently in high-quality duck habitat.

Big Decisions and Sparse Data: Adapting Scientific Publishing to the Needs of Practical Conservation

The biggest challenge in conservation biology is breaking down the gap between research and practical management. A major obstacle is the fact that many researchers are unwilling to tackle projects likely to produce sparse or messy data because the results would be difficult to publish in refereed journals. The obvious solution to sparse data is to build up results from multiple studies. Consequently, we suggest that there needs to be greater emphasis in conservation biology on publishing papers that can be built on by subsequent research rather than on papers that produce clear results individually. This building approach requires: (1) a stronger theoretical framework, in which researchers attempt to anticipate models that will be relevant in future studies and incorporate expected differences among studies into those models; (2) use of modern methods for model selection and multi-model inference, and publication of parameter estimates under a range of plausible models; (3) explicit incorporation of prior information into each case study; and (4) planning management treatments in an adaptive framework that considers treatments applied in other studies. We encourage journals to publish papers that promote this building approach rather than expecting papers to conform to traditional standards of rigor as stand-alone papers, and believe that this shift in publishing philosophy would better encourage researchers to tackle the most urgent conservation problems.